In this set we see a stronger distinction, and see the strength of digital at night. The storm had passed, but there were still clouds moving across the sky as we arrived home that evening. The detail on the digital image is pretty striking compared to the film image. However, a lot may have to do with my film choice. The film image was on Lomography Metropolis, and was the roll I shot at ISO 800. However, it does have an interesting mood to it given the grain and the clouds. Let’s take a look at some photos from New York Fashion Week and compare how they came out in Portra 400 and in Portra 800.

So now to the images. I’m not fooling myself – the digital images are way better in terms of detail – but the film images aren’t too bad, and have a different feeling about them.KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 160NC, 160VC, 400NC, 400VC, and 800 Films" (PDF). Kodak. February 2009 . Retrieved 2009-10-27. After shooting both Portra 400 and Portra 800, I will say that it is much easier to shoot with Portra 400 during the day time if there is a lot of light. If you shoot with Portra 800 and there is too much light, your photos may have the grain that you were looking for, but they are more than likely going to be overexposed. Above: Kodak Portra 800 with Voigtländer Vitessa A . Notice the extreme contrast variation in this scene — to the point of making halation visible (Unlike CineStill 800T, Portra retains its halation layer — but in this case, it got overwhelmed by the powerful outdoor light). In this shot, the film retains natural contrast and colours across all exposure zones — including the places where daylight mixes with fluorescent light. Scanning Portra 800. The more underexposed an image is, the more visible the grain becomes, which can look particularly muddy in dark, shadowed areas of an image. That said, we’re not usually bothered by this, because the alternative would be missing the shot, or getting a blurry image from trying to use a slower shutter speed.

My latest effort came on a weekend trip to New York City. I didn’t have much time in the city, but I wanted to capture a few images at night. I was staying at the New York Edition Hotel, located in the Met Life Tower at Madison Square Park. Our suite had amazing views of the Flatiron Building (sadly covered in scaffolding) and the Empire State Building. Visiting the Empire State Building at sunset was on the agenda for our first evening. So off I went with my Canon EOS R digital mirrorless camera, and the Canon EOS 1v film camera, with some Lomography Metropolis and Kodak Portra 800. Film. Either Portra 800 or Portra 400 can make a good starting point due to their extensive dynamic range (whereas other films will not let you over-expose without erasing significant parts of the image). A big part of the pastel effect is the dominant bright colours, which can be achieved by over-exposing your film +2/+3 stops . For Portra 800, this means rating and shooting it at around ISO 200 and developing it normally. Indeed, setting aside colour choices, made at the enlarger, film scanner driver, or software level, well developed and exposed film has an inherent realism that digital can only approach when one is using near extraordinary, or extraordinary, lenses. Scene selection. This is perhaps the most challenging part of the process. Not every over-exposed shot will look good. Scenes with textured white shades (such as stucco), saturated, even colours and an overall minimalist look will work the best.

In this first set, you see the view from the Empire State Building toward One World Trade Center. It wasn’t completely dark yet. We were there at sunset, but a big storm was rolling over which made it look much darker. The images were taken with two different lenses. I switched between the Canon 24mm f/1.4 and the Canon 50mm f/1.2, so these are not precise comparisons. It’s clear there is a lot more detail in the digital shot, but I’m really drawn to the film image. Both do a great job of conveying the intensity of the storm that was coming our way. I’m amazed I could get anything given the force of the wind.

Kodak Portra of all types works to create images that are warmer than usual. Warm skin tones look good and so that’s what Portra does much more so than PRO 400H. Here is it with lighter skin tones; and for the most part it’s pretty accurate. For a comparison, below is an image shot digitally at the same white balance. You do know that your digital camera, even when shooting raw, makes choices about what data to record? Pastel colour in photography is an effect of lessened contrast and increased overall brightness without any loss in saturation. This type of look is sometimes associated with Wes Anderson’s cinematography.

Kodak Portra 160 vs. 400 vs. 800: What’s the Difference?

The modern iteration of the Kodak Portra film was heavily designed for scanning. So it will translate into digital very well. Kodak Portra 800 wasn’t designed for scanning: it’s got a more classic look to it. Now, it’s not all fun and games – over/under exposing Portra 800 film does have some noticeable downsides.